Wanna build a ss 3.2?
 

If your 3.0 needs a rebuild, consider this:

http://forums.pelicanparts.com/porsche-911-technical-forum/336713-3-2-short-stroke-observations-building-starting.html

If you have a '78-'79, it'll be less costly because you already have the bigger intake and the heads don't need to be ported.

An extra 50 horses, even with CIS, is pretty good.

This engine wants to rev. :D

Here is another option.

3.2 SS twin plug MFI. 320 hp on street gas

10.5:1 JE
DC62 cams
Knife edged crank
ARP rod bolts
Supertec head studs
40 mm intake ports
40 x 41.5 throttle housings
41.5 x 52 stacks
PMO air filters
Supertec distributor (BurnBros parts)
Kennedy high torque clutch
Supertec enrichment device
Supertec valve springs
Aasco titanium retainers
930 turbo oil pump
Supertec sump cover
Supertec fuel lines
and on and on and on
http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1177866684.jpg http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1177866709.jpg

Very, very nice but..........
My poor-man"s ss 3.2 keeping CIS, 964 cams, was about $8000 DIY.
That's close to what a normal 3.0 rebuild would cost.
It's just a suggestion for people that face a rebuild and consider cost.

Now, with the beautiful Schmidt-Rocket, we are probably closer to $20,000.- for this engine?

Henry, just a question about the build of the 3.2SS MFI...you spec'd a knife edged crankshaft. I have read and agree with your opinion that boattailing doesn't do anything meaningful so I was surprised to see that you had done the knife edging, which to me would be an even smaller benefit on a street engine...

Is knife edging a crank a worthwhile thing to do? Is there a material horsepower benefit and if so is it on the order of what boattailing does or is there something else?

Dennis

There is no real benefit in knife edging a crank on a low RPM street engine.
The benefit from knife edging the crank is not less rotating resistance as engine builders of American V8s can quantify.
The benefit in this type of engine is simply a reduction in rotating mass. Simply put, knife edging lightened the crank which reduces crank twist at higher RPMs and assists in acceleration.
It is easier to accelerate a lighter rotating mass similar to the benefits of a lightened flywheel.

We are working on new flywheels and front pulleys that will also help to reduce crank twist and acceleration.

Note the small diameter on the second pulley. This is an attempt to slow the fan and reduce the horse power loss from rotating the fan at a higher RPM than necessary for proper cooling.
These are small changes but we have seen horse power and reliability increases.

http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1177897844.jpg
http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1177897923.jpg http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1177897941.jpg http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1177898011.jpg

Re: Wanna build a ss 3.2?
 

So do you think you have around 230hp???

Re: Re: Wanna build a ss 3.2?
 

For sure.
But only with 98mm P/C's 9.8 : 1 CR, 964-cams, SSI's, Flow-thru muffler and the early CIS with larger intakes.

Building the classic ss 3.2 makes only sense if a 3.0 needs rebuilding anyway or, if one feels doing it just as a challenge.

Keeping an eye on cost is a factor. :) If you want to spend more than $8k, you have many, many options but, if you are happy with 220-230 HP, and need a rebuild anyway, consider it.

I can tell you that the 964-cam comes in strong at 4000 RPM; it feels like an after-burner kicking in.

It is a pleasant surprise. :D

Do you think you would get the same or more horse if you ran carbs instead of running the 3.2ss. Essentially having a 9.8:1, 3.0, 's' cam, SSI's, and a set of 40 pmo carbs?

I am going to do a top end rebuild soon on a '81 3.0, going into a pre-smog car. I bought the motor and it had broken head studs, so the top end is coming off anyways...

That sounds reasonable.
A lot depends on your P/C's.
You'll find out when you replace the studs if you have Mahle or KS?
If you find Alusil, you migh as well go with new 98mm P/C's.
It sounds like you don't want to split the case?
Just putting carbs on a used engine with unknown mileage is risky IMHO.
Unless it's a Euro '81, the intake on the heads are 34.5 mm.
Would the 40's fit on the heads without porting?

For the S-cam, you'll probably need stronger springs and grind the rocker arms?

The motor you're describing is basically very similar to a 3.0RS which put out 230 HP @ 6200 RPM according to factory specs. You'd be using carbs instead of MFI though.

You would have to change your pistons though because you can't use CIS pistons with S cams.

The motor would be different in charachter to the 3.2 CIS motor. The 3.2 CIS would be more street/autocross friendly compared to the S cam 3.0. The S cam 3.0, on the other hand, would be a bit more track friendly. (Of course, if you have racing in mind, the class you choose will be your determining factor)

Basically the 3.2 CIS will have more low end torque and the 3.0 S cam will have better upper range torque.

The 3.2 CIS will have better cold/warm-up manners and should also give you better gas mileage. Ease of maintenence will be a big plus as well.

The 3.0 S cam, however, will sound like a mechanical symphony when it hits 6000 RPM.

Apples and oranges. Both tasty treats.

I figured out what SS means... Short Stroke.

What if I was shooting for max torque on my stock 3.2?

I am reading Bruce Anderson's performance handbook. I have a stock 3.2 Carrera 1985. Thinking about 98mm P&Cs with a GE40 cam to get 3.4 for street use and AX. BA descibes this as a bolt on. If I opened the motor to change cams and P&C, would I have to change springs, rod bolts etc? Would that be a humongous can of worms?

Also, with motronic, what are my options for larger throttle bodies? Am I even asking the right questions?

I start out with 207HP? Cat bypass, free flow exhaust, Steve Wong chip, and now I may be at 220? How do I get to 270?

Thanks for your thoughts.. I am willing to read every thread on the forum from start to finish to educate myself. I have read BA from cover-to-cover three times.

Reeeeeeallly! :)

EVERY time the factory rod bolts are loosened, they must be replaced. For a 3,2, rod bolts are a recommended upgrade to ARP.

You can replace pistons and cams without opening the case, but if your motor has alot of miles on it, the rods will need to be re-sized.

In wayne's rebuild book there is a 3.7 cis motor that has 280-300hp, with CIS and 10:1 compression. It uses a 3.2 crank, 104mm pistons and twin plug heads.

You can get alot more horse by ditching the CIS...

Jeffrey,
98mm P&Cs & a corresponding head chamfer will give you a nice 3.4. If you want to keep Motronic, I would recommend the 20/21 cams. You can't use hotter (such as GE40) cams with Motronic; this would necessitate a conversion to carbs or individual throttle body FI.

Anytime you take apart stock factory bolts, you need to replace them. On a 3.2, it's a very good idea to use ARP rod bolts. I never use factory 9mm rod bolts in a 3.2.

Motronic with the stock throttle body works quite well on 3.2's and 3.4's. You could bore out the throttle body to a larger size, though. As far as exhaust, you may need to investigate smog regulations where you live, but the best exhaust is a header-type "equal length" setup w/o a cat. On a 3.4, a "free-flow exhaust" would be something like 1-5/8" headers or 993 heat exchangers. Another thing to think about is twin-plugging the heads.

All-in-all, to go from an old 3.2 to a fresh 3.4 twin-plug with exhaust, cams, Steve W chip and high compression (~10:1), it's probably right in the ballpark of $10k. Twin-plugging is about $1500 extra over single-plug (highly recommended when doing a 98mm and larger bore), and 98mm P&C are around $2,000. This motor can pretty easily push 270+ hp, using Motronic which is easy to live with. A hot 3.4 with carbs and a gnarly cam, for example, might make about ~330+ hp.

If he has a good bottom end, is it neccesary to open up the case?

Is there anyway to check if your rods are stretched w/o opening the case?

Great stuff but...................

You are leading this post in a different direction.

My intent in posting details on a classic ss 3.2 was to help someone who is facing a rebuild on a 3.0 with CIS and is considering an extra 50 horses without spending a fortune.

I think you should start a different thread to deal with upgrading a Motronic 3.2.

It's a different animal.

Friendly greetings. :)

Although a great number of engine builders (some good) will replace rod bearings without splitting the case, I will not.
I always want to spin the rod all the way around a crank after I install it.
It just makes me feel better to know that what I have assembled feels good. I can't count the number of times I have install a rod on a crank and had a tight spot half way around. It is very common for a rod journal to measure out of round in a good running engine.

The cost to split the case is so little by the time you have the rods off that measuring and polishing the crank seems like a no brainer.

Gunter:

This looks like exactly what I want to do with my 3.0. I have a 1979 SC with head stud problems. Given that I likely have Alusial Cylinders, this seemed like a no brainer to me - replace the P&C with a 98mm set to bump displacement. Isn't this very similar to the period Works 1 / Max Moritz bump that some owners did right out of the factory?

Did you run into any issues with fuel delivery? The builders I have spoken to all want to replace the CIS with PMOs. When I suggest staying with the CIS they are concerned that the result will be starved for fuel. What changes made this a non-issue?

Thanks,

Ed

Control is an illusion.
Posts have their own life and go in the direction of least resistance.
Resistance is futile.:)

We appreciate your intention but I would question your assertion that the engine you describe actually makes 50 additional horse power. Perhaps a dyno sheet is in the future?

Gunter, a 3.2 can just be another starting point. Maybe it's not a 3.2 Short Stroke, but who cares? Your point was about adding "98mm P/C's 9.8 : 1 CR, 964-cams, SSI's, Flow-thru muffler" which are all retrofittable to a 3.2. I've rebuilt 3.0s and 3.2s. Guess what, they both cost virtually the same amount of money to rebuild. Different animal, maybe, but still relevant. Did you twin-plug your heads when you built your 3.2SS? I would be a bit worried about 9.8:1 on single plugs w/ 98mm pistons.....sounds like a recipe for detonation.

Cheers SmileWavy

Scott

I have a 3.2 upgrade on my car....it is a 930/03 engine (European 3.0) and I have the 9.8 compression Mahle 98mm P/C's on it. It got a gentle port/polish, stock cam and valve train, stock Euro CIS, single plug, SSI's, factory '74 muffler.

Been running the engine for about 13 years now, only about 30k km, on it, it runs like a clock on the 91 CLC gas we get here in Canada. Never heard or suspected any detonation anywhere at any time.

Probably the only question I have about it is whether the plugs I run in it are too cold...W3CS....tempted to try W4CS, but I am a little chicken.

I am at about 1000m altitude (Calgary) which buys you a bit of octane relief.....

Dennis

Dennis:
Before the rebuild, I researched thoroughly various issues.
JW recommended that I stay with W5DC for the ss 3.2 and that worked fine, no issues.
You'd be surprised with a 964-profile on your stock cams and springs:
A real kick after 4000 RPM exactly like Camgrinder described.
Cam-timing is 1.4 mm per JW's suggestion.
Very happy so far.

No issues with fuel delivery because a '79 already has the larger intakes and corresponding FD and WUR.
Other pioneers have done this so many times that it was easy to just copy the formula.
I am not into carbs.
I like CIS, especially the '78-'79, it's reliable and the mixture is easily adjusted.
Costwise, I liked the fact that one can stay with stock springs for the 964-cam.
If you go with carbs, you can try a hotter cam with upgraded springs.
What CR for the MM P/C's?
9.8 is o.k. for single plug.
Tried to reply your E-mail but it came back: Cannot be delivered.

How true.

Before the rebuild, I asked a lot of questions about what to expect re: HP for a ss 3.2 with 964-cams and SSI's.

http://forums.pelicanparts.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=318251&highlight=short+ stroke+3.

As you can see, many gurus felt that 230 HP was quite doable with my description of all the components.
I have another stock 3.0 liter and the difference is so very noticeable.
Just as Camgrinder told me: The 964-cam will kick in after 4000 RPM, and it does!
I wouldn't have gone through the trouble without getting an extra ~50 horses and the experts confirmed beforehand.
If it's only 46.9, that's fine with me!
It all started with buying a running stock 3.0 and then making a ss 3.2 out of it while keeping my other 3.0.
It was a nice experience and I am very happy so far.
Like JW suggested, I use W5dc plugs and 1.4 mm for the cam timing. 9.8 : 1 CR is no problem for single plug.

Of course, one usually wants more power but I guess I am the modest type? Even 40+ extra HP make me happy.

Anyway, for anyone facing a rebuild with concerns about costs, I highly recommend making a classic ss 3.2 out of a 3.0 for about the same money.
Whether you end up with 45, 50 or 47.5 extra horses is then left to the experts who can pick it apart. :D

After reading through the link it seems the consensus is that there is no consensus.

subscribe

Mark:
If you want to do your '78, go for it; you'll love the extra horses.
You already have the larger intake and heads.
98mm P/C's with 9.8 :1 CR, 964-cams and SSI's..............
Would I do it again? Absolutely; very cost-effective and fun.
I like CIS but lots of people will argue for carbs.
For that matter, lots of people will argue no matter what you do and pick it apart. :rolleyes:

Enjoy. :)

Gunter,
Thanks for the reply. Afraid that in the People's Rep. of Kalif. I cannot go to SSI's...no room for cats. Carbs would be out too. Smog Nazi's are serious down here. With 148K on the clock I wonder if I should figure on splitting the case anyway....hate to. It runs great as is and leaks no oil....but I'd love the extra horses.

If it runs great and leaks no oil, don't split the case.
I would just take out the cams and have them reground to 964 using the same springs. Cam timing 1.4 mm.
Do not feed new chains on to old chain sprockets on the I-shaft!
Keep the old chains.
For an easy DIY distibutor service, and maximum advance timing, I posted both procedures with good results. Do a search.
Like many other engines, the unknown factor is P/C's when splitting the case. If you find KS Alusil, a serious decision has to be made.

Gunter,
Can you elaborate on this? I'm pretty green when it comes to engine rebuild stuff but willing to learn. What decision/options?

Re-ringing Alusil P/C's is a gamble that many people don't do.
Do a search on this issue.
Since you don't intend to split the case, leave it alone; just do the 964-cams.

Gunter,
I see what you mean...just looked up cost of new P/C's....yikes ! That is a serious decision.

3.2ss
 

I have a 78 3.0 with high millage and some oil leakage but good leakdowns. I have no history on the engine so I am considering a rebuild before anything lets go. I like the sound of the engine that you built. When doing this build are there any problems with the rods or rod bolts with the larger pistons (6,500 rpm max)? Also when building stroker motors of the V-8 variety the piston pin height changes. Is this a non issue for porsches I have not seen it mentioned so I assume not. But if anyone can tell me for sure I would appreciate it. Also if it does not have an effect why? Thanks for any help.

Hi Gunter,
Thanks for posting a lower cost solution for 3.0's.
This addresses smog issues for those for which it is a very real problem.
There is always a more powerful update to any engine, usually accompanied with a significant increase in cost.
So much of what we do on this board is to come up with cost effective modifications of varying degrees.
Most just want a bit more than we currently have.
We all admire Henry's engines and his knowledge, however not everyone wants to or can afford to go that direction.
In fact if money were no object we'd all be running the newest, best that Porsche offers.
Thanks Gunter,

To answer the stroker crank question, if you change the crank from 70.4 (3.0) to 74.4 (3.2) there is a wrist pin issue. The wrist pin height is different (heigher in the 3.2) and the pin in the 3.2 is 23mm where the 3.0 is 22mm.

Thank you,

So if you go with the 98 jugs you have to specify that you are using the 3 liter crank to get the right piston pin location correct? When I see these sets sold I do not see it called out.

Forget about the crank-stroke and wrist pin location.
The 98 mm P/C's for a 3.0 are bolt-on; no modifications required.
The ss 3.2 was popular from day one with SC owners and has been proven over time; it's simple and cost effective; no machining required on the heads if you have a '78-'79.
All you specify when ordering is that it is for a 3.0, the CR you want, and maybe the dome-shape for the pistons.
If you stay with CIS, you'll order the CIS dome.
As for CR, 9.8 : 1 is still good for single plug.

Send out the crank for checking/polishing, send out the rods for re-bushing along with a new wrist pin, send out the heads for a valve job, replace the head studs (Exhaust side).
Have the rockers re-furbished along with new shafts if necessary.
Have the cams re-ground to a 964 profile if you stay with CIS. (That way you can use OEM springs)

In short, follow the excellent instructions in Wayne's book.
Get the book and read beforehand to get answers to your questions.

It's just a little more $ than a regular re-build to make a ss 3.2 but, you'll feel the results.

Most professionals will tell you that 9.8:1 compression on a large bore CIS engine is pushing your luck.

It is important to remember that it is not uncommon to see detonation issues with CIS engine 80-83 US versions. These engines were only 9.3:1
I can't tell you the number of times I have disassembled an engine from these model years that had a broken piston from detonation. This is caused by many factors, not the least of which is the quality of fuel available in the US.
The other factors are, lean running as the result of the lambda control system (smog). Another important issue is the nature of the hemi head found in all two valve 911 heads.
Large diameter hemi heads detonate by the very nature of their design.
If you intent to run 9.8:1 there are a few good ideas.
Order 7 pistons when you purchase your pistons.
Guarantee good fuel quality 93 octane or better
Euro fuel distributor
Control head temperatures (big cooler)
Recurve the ignition distributor
Pray
Good luck

Good stuff there, Henry.

Euro FD because of higher capacity to deliver fuel?
I assume that the FD from a US '78-'79 is about the same as a Euro '78-'83 since both have the larger intakes?

I understand detonation to mean combustion much before TDC? Or?

Higher octane means advanced combustion?

Recurve the ignition distributor to achieve more retard at higher RPM? Or?